On Sunday, August 19, 2018 at 2:13:32 AM UTC, John Clark wrote: > > On Sat, Aug 18, 2018 at 5:52 PM, <agrays...@gmail.com <javascript:>> > wrote: > > > >> *I'm from Missouri; SHOW ME! * > > > I show you the double slit experiment. David Deutsch said if other worlds > are just a interpretation of the double slit experiment then dinosaur are > just a interpretation of dinosaur bones. I'm not sure I'd go quite as far > as Deutsch but I see what he's driving at. > > > >> > >> *How does a differential equation on the time rate of change of the wf, >> imply that ALL eigenvalues of ALL possible eigenstates of some operator, >> must be measured?* >> > > A differential equation can't imply that, it doesn't imply anything about > measurement and that is exactly the point. You say ad hoc that there is a > mysterious magical thing called "measurement" which you can't define that > does all sorts of mysterious magical things that you can't explain. Many > Worlds doesn't care what a "measurement" means because it has nothing to do > with it and it doesn't stick in anything about the wave the equation > describes collapsing because the mathematics says nothing about anything > collapsing, the Copenhagen people like to stick that stuff in ad hoc. . >
*So your claim is that because the SWE doesn't say anything about measurements, presumably the wf continues to evolve forever. How does this imply that all possible eigenvalues must be measured? If not measured, then what? The wf just continues to evolve forever? But how does this imply that all eigenvalues must be realized, some would say "measured". IMO, there's still a huge gap between the SWE as a mathematical statement, and what you claim must be measured, or shall we say observed. AG * > > > >> > >> *One could just assume that the wf is purely epistemic and leave these >> additional postulates, which aren't used to calculate probabilities, in the >> dustbin of history.* >> > > Many physicists believe in the "shut up and calculate" quantum > interpretation and do exactly that, and that works fine if all you're a > engineer and all you want is to make the next iPhone, but its less than > satisfying if you have the slightest bit of curiosity about whats going on > at the most fundamental level of reality. It seems to me if all physics > could do is say that if a instrument is in orientation X the needle on a > voltmeter will read 42 and in orientation Y it will read 43 and no further > conclusion could be drawn from that then physics would be a incredibly dull > subject because I'm really not really all that interested in needles on > voltmeters in themselves, I'm interested in what they may imply. > > John K Clark > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
